Posted: Feb 16, 2015 4:17 pm
surreptitious57 wrote:No publication is responsible for the reaction of its readers to what it prints and so the notion of social responsibility and particularly for a satirical magazine is rather nonsensical. For the two are to all intents and purposes complete opposites.
Publications clearly can have some responsibility for the outcomes of the reactions of readers, even the illegal actions of readers.
If a newspaper wrongly names someone as a child molester and that person is killed by vigilantes, the newspaper does have some responsibility for the death of the victim if the risk of harm to the victim is meaningfully predictable, irrespective of the harm being criminal acts on the part of others.
Responsibility isn't a zero-sum game.
Even if a publication bears significant responsibility for an ultimate outcome, that needn't meaningfully detract from the responsibility of others for the outcome any more than having someone inciting a murder means that an actual murderer is thereby meaningfully less responsible - the incitement is an extra offence, not simply a divvying-up of responsibility for the offence of the actual murder.